“Christians must be very careful not to claim that science can never prove a biological basis for sexual orientation.”
Oh. So sorry I never got that memo. But if “basis” means “cause” I will quite vociferously deny it.
If Moehler is intending to torment the pansexual left by being provocative, then I think he is being brilliant. But if he seriously means to recommend alterations in fetal chemistry to rig the right feelings, then I am seriously concerned.
Let me ask you men this: If I offered you a drug that drastically altered your sex drive so you no longer had to remember to look the other way while going by the Victoria’s Secret store in the mall, or an injection you could give your sons so you wouldn’t have to wave them away from the SoftpornIllustrated magazine in the racks in every damn store in the world, would you use it? I assure you that you’ll still have your sex drive for your wives–at least as often as she’s already in the mood (Camille Paglia points out somewhere that the studies indicate lesbian couples have sex slightly less often than married couples while homosexual males have sex a great deal more often). But you’ll mostly be uninterested and not even notice stimuli in general.
How many of you would line up? I reckon only slightly more than would be willing to castrate yourselves.
No, you would hate the idea of becoming a shadow of yourself. You would realize lust is a sin but you would know the answer lies elsewhere, namely:
For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people, training us to renounce ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age, waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works.
That, not a patch on your mother’s womb, is what Christians should be recommending.
What I’m trying to say is that you would be hard to convince that my miracle therapy would not seriously dampen and alter who you are. And I think it is fundamentally unrealistic to think there are people who are like other people in every possible way except they just happen to be attractedin a samesex direction. No, we’re talkinng about altering personality. And I don’t think that’s right. Yes, we have to tell people to repent of samesex and live according to God’s word. But do we really want to tell people that there is something wrong with whole personalities–that God never wanted male hairdressers (or insert favorite stereotype based on half-truths here) to exist? It is fine to reduce animals to impulses but things are more complex with human beings. Curing rams may not have problematic consequences but altering people’s personalities is a different issue.
I think we’re going to be hated either way, but I still would rather tell people to embrace celibacy or marriage and appreciate how God has made them rather than saying that there is a whole part of the spectrum that should be wiped out by prenatal testing and gene-therapy.*
And frankly, there are real people working through real issues right now who do not need to hear a major Christian leader telling them they are stuck the way they are unless they get chemical treatments. What they need to hear is that there is a way for them to truly reflect God’s glory that involves rejecting sin while being thankful for who they are rather than ashamed.
Dr. Moehler is a great Christian leader. But I think this published opinion is a mistake.
*Addendum: Dr. Moehler has written more here on the resulting controversy. He says some really good things. He also seems to think that any “gene-therapy” reference is a misrepresentation of what he wrote. Readers are invited to read for themselves and decide for themselves if this is an offense against true reporting.
